skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you need to adjust cursor speed and want scroll behavior to differ between the TrackPad and a mouse, then I can vouch for LinearMouse [1]. It is free of charge and open-source, and perfectly covers my needs.

[1]: https://github.com/linearmouse/linearmouse
Stripe's 4242424242424242 4/24 doesn't work anymore
As a steelman, wouldn't the abundance of infinitely generate-able situations make it _easier_ for us to develop strong theories and models? The bottleneck has always been data. You have to do expensive work in the real world and accurately measure it before you can start fitting lines to it. If we were to birth an e.g. atomically accurate ML model of quantum physics, I bet it wouldn't take long until we have mathematical theories that explain why it works. Our current problem is that this stuff is super hard to manipulate and measure.
Yes, and we keep trying!
World's largest vacuum to suck climate pollution out of the air just opened
The "gotcha" is the surface level claim it's inconsistent because it follows borders (indirectly initally stated for diminutive effect). That's not inherently inconsistent in itself, I've attempted to explain why, and you've given no defense as to why it should always be inconsistent and how that explanation applies to other philosophies considered consistent.

Disagreeing with an ideology comes down to more than parading a surface level claim to declare the entire idea misaligned. You have to dissect that idea, try to find ways to defend it, then cleanly counter those ideas. Throwing up a facetious one liner is the exact opposite of inspecting a philosophy and it's easy to misunderstand any set of morals that way.

As another example of why it's poor form of logic: "He thinks it's okay to kill some people but not others, that must be unethical and misaligned - why does it matter who it is it should always apply equally! The morality is therefore inherently flawed unless this is corrected." when the actual moral was that there are only certain cases it makes moral sense to kill someone (with some justifications if you dive into it) like compassion for terminal illness. Instead of the surface level "gotcha" denial you would dive into what these reasons might be and why you disagree with them, not just blurt the surface disagreement. This tends to be a lot more discussive of the idea instead of immediately dismissive, even when you ultimately disagree with it.
The bit rate of a speccy tape recording was only about 1500 bps, and we routinely recorded on the cheapest tapes, and tape machines that were little better. I'm sure it'll be fine.

Technical details for those interested: https://sinclair.wiki.zxnet.co.uk/wiki/Spectrum_tape_interfa...
Depending on how you game and what games you play, steam + proton works really well on Linux.
A quick look at the rewrite of coreutils with Rust and the history of NetBSD
Many of our existing physical models can be decomposed into "high-confidence, well tested bit" plus "hand-wavy empirically fitted bit". I'd like to see progress via ML replacing the empirical part - the real scientific advancement then becomes steadily reducing that contribution to the whole by improving the robust physical model incrementally. Computational performance is another big influence though. Replacing the whole of a simulation with an ML model might still make sense if the model training is transferrable and we can take advantage of the GPU speed-ups, which might not be so easy to apply to the foundational physical model solution. Whether your model needs to be verified against real physical models depends on the seriousness of your use-case; for nuclear weapons and aerospace weather forecasts I imagine it will remain essential, while for a lot of consumer-facing things the ML will be good enough.
Unfortunately here in the UK, Ofcom doesn't agree:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/news-centre/2024/tech-firms-must-ta...

"Sites and apps must introduce robust age-checks to prevent children seeing harmful content such as suicide, self-harm and pornography"
The CAs being centralized is not a problem. They do the verification and issue the certificate. The privacy concern stems from using the certificate and CAs are not involved in that process.

Yes you do have to trust someone and the CA is the trusted entity for doing the verification, but once they do the verification and in effect encode that verification onto a certificate, their role is done.
We are not (or should not) be talking about an overnight change. Parking lots and ramps wear out over time and have to be replaced (ramps must be replaced for safety reasons, lots you can fill the holes with gravel and continue using if the market will allow). Likewise buildings reach the point where you can start asking if remodeling is better than tearing down (often to build larger). Cities should be changing over time, so remove one old lot/ramp/building and watch what happens. If parking is needed you will see that as existing lots/ramps fill and raise rates, while if it isn't needed you will see. And of course as you build larger that means more people which in turn gives transit a boost in rider which in turn means you can increase service making cars less needed. Every year every lot/ramp/building owner should observe the city compared to their real estate and decide if maybe it is time to do something different.
I am so confused by this comment. Accounting software for small businesses is standard. Quick books is so ubiquitous and it's dirt cheap and supposed to be operated by a lay person. There are whole professions here are almost exclusively small businesses. Trucking being a decent call out. I know several moonlighting tech people who spun up single person businesses using a template and carried on that way for years just using very basic accounting software. They do contracts and everything on their own. I have an aunt who has spun up several businesses doing business with the actual federal government and she's never had more than an accountant she has check her receipts for taxes. She has no background in anything and somehow was able to launch these businesses. I have writer friends and artist friends who have LLCs. I've never heard anything like what you're talking about.

I don't know anything about the UK, but it most certainly is not hard to spin up a business in the US.
The most dangerous thing about SB 1047 is that it is legislation without purpose. As the article rightly points out, it covers no real activities, and its requirement to be able to shut the machine down is, as far as anyone can figure, derived from watching The Terminator. A bill like this delegitimizes government altogether. I liken it to Dennis Kucinich's quixotic attempt to ban space-based mind control weapons.
/s is strong with this one
Because the Liberals are the ones that have fucked up the last 9 years. The PCs fucked it up under Stephen Harper, the most anti-Canadian PM in history until Justin Trudeau. I could have tolerated his sickening virtue signaling but his use of the War Measures Act is the most fascist anti-Canadian act in history and I will never forgive him.
I very much understand the roles of CAs :)
These processes are both beyond human comprehension because they contain vast layers of tiny interactions and also not practical to simulate. This tech will allow for exploration for accurate simulations to better understand new ideas if needed.
I imagine there was a mechanical, rotating drum with metal contacts to "randomly" trip the scoreboard. There would have been 5 such patterns on the drum. I even imagine a human was operating the drum, choosing among the five possible patterns.

I could be wrong but this was early in the era of popular computing — and interfacing with high-current lamp circuits would have been a challenge for most. The other compelling reason to believe it was mechanical is that having only 5 patterns seems really lame if there was software driving it.

Why only 16 of the possible 18 tiles would ever have the Whammy, I have no speculation.
A few things:

1. Research can then focus on where things go wrong

2. ML models, despite being "black boxes," can still have brute-force assessment performed of the parameter space over covered and uncovered areas by input information

3. We tend to assume parsimony (i.e Occam's razor) to give preference to simpler models when all else is equal. More complex black-box models exceeding in prediction let us know the actual causal pathway may be more complex than simple models allow. This is okay too. We'll get it figured out. Not everything is closed-form, especially considering quantum effects may cause statistical/expected outcomes instead of deterministic outcomes.
If the ointer points to a very large block of memory, is it an oinker?
I think it's implicit in their description of filtering the training set, where they say they only include structures with resolution of 9A or less. NMR structures don't really have a resolution, that's more specific to crystallography. However, I can't actually verify that no NMR structures were included without directly inspecting their list of selected structures.
A quick take: CO2 gets pushed deep underground into basaltic rock, which apparently reacts with the CO2 to form CaCO3, MgCO3, maybe others. I.e., it turns into a stable solid so it doesn't ooze back to the surface.
This certainly appears to have been the case at Twitter. Many employees, if appearances are to be believed, seemed to socialize and eat (free) for a living while proudly declaring themselves and their organization to be 'not really capitalist, more like socialist,' or whatever that one hidden camera quote was.

The well-meaning technocracy cannot sustain indefinitely, it seems, which is a relief.
Bringing psql’s \d to your web browser
The Evolution of Beef: How social media is changing rap feuds
I know this is tongue in cheek, but you absolutely can be restricted from having a biological weapons factory in your basement (similar to not being able to pick "nuclear bombs" as your arms to bear).
Well, it's because you can design deadly viruses using this technology. Viruses gain entry to living cells via cell-surface receptor proteins whose normal job is to bind signalling molecules, alter their conformation and translate that external signal into the cellular interior where it triggers various responses from genomic transcription to release of other signal molecules. Viruses hijack such mechanisms to gain entry to cells.

Thus if you can design a viral coat protein to bind to a human cell-surface receptor, such that it gets translocated into the cell, then it doesn't matter so much where that virus came from. The cell's firewall against viruses is the cell membrane, and once inside, the biomolecular replication machinery is very similar from species to species, particularly within restricted domains, such as all mammals.

Thus viruses from rats, mice, bats... aren't going to have major problems replicating in their new host - a host they only gained access to because some nation-state actors working in collaboration on such gain-of-function research in at least two labs on opposite sides of the world with funds and material provided by the two largest economic powers for reasons that are still rather opaque, though suspiciously banal...

Now while you don't need something like AlphaFold3 to do recklessly stupid things (you could use directed evolution, making millions of mutatad proteins, throwing them at a wall of human cell receptors and collecting what stuck), it makes it far easier. Thus Google doesn't want to be seen as enabling, though given their prediliction for classified military-industrial contracting to a variety of nation-states, particularly with AI, with revenue now far more important than silly "don't be evil" statements, they might bear watching.

On the positive side, AlphaFold3 will be great for fields like small molecular biocatalysis, i.e. industrial applications in which protein enzymes (or more robust heterogenous catalysts designed based on protein structures) convert N2 to ammonia, methane to methanol, or selectively bind CO2 for carbon capture, modification of simple sugars and amino acids, etc.
Likely inspired by https://github.com/google/butteraugli
iOS developer here, CoreML is used for edge deployments in the ML space. Just not training. Obviously linux is king but that's for server side my dude.
Hi, it's not “sent only once” . It's millions of “sent only once” .

The thing here are that all those RPC are stateless, so the context for compression are the one message itself. i.e. compress object like `Point(1,2)` only without priori knowledge. Users may use train static zstd. But Fury can't, Fury doesn't know which data will be serialized.

And meta string encoding are not statistical, it won't beats zstd. It's just for cases zstd is not suitable.
The amount of APIs in the world that require concurrency within a single request scope to meet latency needs approaches zero.

In practice, you don’t make that db call until the auth request is done and the user is verified. In practice, you don’t make the outgoing api call until you already have the results of the db call, because you need your data to form the outgoing request. Etc.

APIs where intra request concurrency is needed absolutely exist. But they’re the exception not the rule, even at large scale tech co’s. And yes. Rails is a bad choice for those.
Looks very cool! Congrats on the launch.

"For complex queries where Devv Agent infers your question before selecting appropriate solutions."

Could you expand on this a bit? What does "infers your question" mean?

It's not all that clear to me from the site or your post when Fast Mode vs. Agent Mode should be used. Is Fast Mode for answering conversational questions and Agent Mode for answers that involve writing code?
It is for at home, I bought a new mini PC that came with Windows 11 and I installed Ubuntu straight away.
Nearly 1/4th of their revenue is Apple services, and its their primary source of revenue growth to feed the beast.
Except that being on a phone I can't scan a QR code being displayed on the same device.

But basically you're saying that I need a QR code for each site I'm using? That's not obvious from reading the blog post. And still doesn't address that someone else could use the same code on the same site?

Also I don't think I understand what "the secrecy of your social insurance number/credit card doesn't matter as long as nobody else can generate a certificate for it" means. Is that assuming everyone only accepts certificates and not the raw information anymore?

I'm sure fraudsters would happily take credit card numbers even without being able to generate certificates.
Kind of like knots...
To quote Judge Easterbrook from the 7th Circuit: So what? Who cares? If TikTok and its parent have been remiss in documentation or the ability of the entity to operate on its own in America then that’s their problem. When cigarette advertising was outlawed we didn’t ask whether there was a sufficient alternative advertising pipeline for the tobacco companies to access teens. The law only “bans” TikTok insofar as TikTok refuses to comply. You might say “this is beyond TikTok’s control because China won’t permit it” but why should the USA care about that?
As I understand it, pandas can read parquet if the pyarrow or fastparquet packages are available, but that's not the case and attempts to fix that have been underway for several years.

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=970021
Great news! Very happy to see that it's finally here.

I use Phoenix (with and without LiveView) every day both at my day job and on side projects, and I couldn't be happier with it. I'm so blazingly productive in this stack; it makes webdev with anything else feel like running in quicksand.

I'm really excited to see how Elixir develops in the years ahead. It's still relatively small, but it's only getting bigger and I think it has a very bright future.
In D, any function can be used to evaluate at compile time. If it is used for a constant-expression and cannot be evaluated at compile time, it is a compilation error. Also, the entire function needn't be evaluatable at compile time - only the path taken through it.

Simply no need for tagging them one way or another.
I love how he used that to try to freeze his cat!
There is a top comment above classifying it as a scam
> the control of possibly the most politically extreme and anti-constitutional subculture in the entire country?

What are you trying to refer to here? Because the most politically extreme and anti-constitutional subculture I can think of right now is QAnon, which has not (nor is not) in control of Twitter.
Lua based row-level transformations during Postgres CDC
The thing is that we can't store a precomputed dictionary. Fury is just a serialization framework, we don't know which data will be serialized
Pretty cool!

Looks like there's an opportunity to improve the fast mode by caching the results for simple searches.
How safe is London these days? It's gaining a reputation in some circles for being a scary and dangerous place. Is there any truth to that?
I don't actually, but it can be explained in a few lines of code. Consider the following two simple functions:

def ref(obj):
return id(obj)

def deref(addr):
import ctypes
return ctypes.cast(addr, ctypes.py_object).value

Basically, this relies on an implementation detail of `id()` in CPython: the unique id of an object is its memory address. `ref()` returns a reference to an object (think `&` in C), and `deref()` dereferences it back (think `*` in C). This is close to the standard `weakref` module in essence, but weakref is a black box.

Now even though the callstack is cleared upon fork of the worker processes, you still have the parent objects available, and properly tracked and refcounted, as you can check from `gc.get_objects()`. This is in fact a feature of `gc` as explained in the doc (https://docs.python.org/3/library/gc.html):

> If a process will fork() without exec(), avoiding unnecessary copy-on-write in child processes will maximize memory sharing and reduce overall memory usage. This requires both avoiding creation of freed “holes” in memory pages in the parent process and ensuring that GC collections in child processes won’t touch the gc_refs counter of long-lived objects originating in the parent process. To accomplish both, call gc.disable() early in the parent process, gc.freeze() right before fork(), and gc.enable() early in child processes.

Now whenever you want to send large objects to a `multiprocessing.Pool` or `concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor`, you can avoid expensive pickling by just sending these references.

class BigObject: pass

def child(rbo):
bo = deref(rbo)
return bo.compute_something()

def parent():
bo1 = BigObject()
bo2 = BigObject()
with Pool(2) as pool:
result = pool.map(child, [ref(bo1), ref(bo2)])

In a real codebase though, there are some caveats around this. You cannot take the reference of just anything, there are temporaries, cached small integers, etc. You will need some form of higher level wrapper around `ref()` to properly choose when and what to reference or to copy.

Also it may be inconvenient to have your child functions explicitely dereference their parameters, it will force you to write _dereference wrappers_ around your original functions. A good strategy I've used is to create a proxy class that stores a reference and override `__getstate__`/`__setstate__` for pickling itself as reference and unpickling itself as a proxy. That way, you can transparently pass these proxies to your original functions without any modification.
https://archive.ph/Qoo6T
Very cool!! I am unfortunately very far from an AI expert. Can you share how you built this? Did you have to train your own model, or is it an open source model that you finetuned for climbing?
Before macOS became NextStep it was practically a different company. I’ve been using Apple hardware for 21 years, when they got a real operating system. Even the G4 did better than the laptop it replaced.
I think it is very plausible that they don't use NMR structures here, but I was looking for a specific statement on it in the paper. I think your guess is plausible, but I don't think the paper is clear enough here to be sure about this interpretation.
It's vexing to me why a company like Google has so many employees. Does running an ad server and search engine really need tens of thousands of people? Perhaps many of these engineers are on-call if something goes wrong to fix the problem ASAP. Investors ought to care how much money is being wasted on superfluous hiring.
Tech firms must tame toxic algorithms to protect children online
- Ofcom sets out more than 40 practical steps that services must take to keep children safer
- Sites and apps must introduce robust age-checks to prevent children seeing harmful content such as suicide, self-harm and pornography
- Harmful material must be filtered out or downranked in recommended content
CC-BY-SA is a perpetual license, so the author can't just decide that they don't want StackOverflow to have access to the content anymore.
The state in this case is merely your select buddies, who also murder and rob others and especially the weak.

While I acknowledge the difficulties in justice with murder you're just arguing over which group of buddies is the bestest, and picking the biggest murderer of them all. Not seeing any improvement.
2005 web style!
I am unsure where the proof, or even supporting argument, would come from for such a statement. The literature is lengthy and deep, but I would sum up the current understanding and most popular argument against your stated position by citing Robert Harper (who I admit is notoriously anti-Laziness by default) in his commentary to the 2nd Edition to Practical Foundations of Programming Languages:

"The problem is the very idea of a lazy language, which imposes a ruinous semantics on types. An eager semantics supports the expected semantics of types (for example, the natural numbers are the natural numbers) and, moreover, admits definition of the lazy forms of these types using suspension types (Chapter 36). A value of a suspension type is either a value of the underlying type, or a computation of such a value that may diverge. There being no representation of the eager types in a lazy language, it follows that, eager languages are strictly more expressive than lazy languages." [1]

This paragraph is then followed by a link to Harper's "PCF by Value" supplement/errata to the above referenced PFPL, where such a statement is reinforced. [2]

[1] - https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/supplements/commentary.pdf

[2] - https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/supplements/pcfv.pdf
Recent Trends in Malicious Packages Targeting Discord
Some of those “hackers” are twelve years olds, so earning money may not be the most important thing for them.
My impression is that, at a place like MS, bugs are often reported by a separate team accountable to different metrics.
any insights in how you built it?
Not really. Adjusted for inflation, that's only $300,000 today. Even in the lowest cost of living areas, $300K isn't doing much for you. If you used it to buy a rental in a great area with a high return, you'd still only get about $15,000 a year in rental profits.
I think LLMs are great for making custom doc examples to learn from but writing production code? nah
probably should read "trained swimmer with fins"

It can take some time to get used to fins and the motions needed. Many more people have ridden a bike
Some people genuinely freeze up or overthink to their detriment in an interview setting, despite being competent otherwise.

Happened to me a couple of times back in university when I had to get an internship for one of the semesters.
That is not a real concern, just a confusion on how statistics works :(
Aren't batons made to not produce serious injury? I.e. they're meant to coerce.
There will be an iterative process built around curated training datasets - continually improved, top tier models, teams reverse engineering the model's understanding and reasoning, and applying that to improve datasets and training.